Sigmaster Current and Opening Day Rosters -- Released

[eko718]

Roster Highlights

Hall of Fame Ratings Scale

Players rated against all-time standards; ratings were done by formula and are in line with the scale 2K uses for each rating category. Main adjusted ratings include, shooting (contest and uncontested), rebounding, blocks, steals and draw foul tendency based on advanced statistics per nba.com and basketballreference.

Roster Tendency Adjustments

Correct tendencies for shot location, shot frequency, touches, shot type(contested/uncontested), etc. for nearly every player in the league in accordance with statistics on nba.com. All players, especially those whose games changed significantly from last season to this season, ie: Oladipo, A Gordon, Giannis, etc. play accurately.

Signature Shot/Style Accuracy

Shooting updates for nearly every player in the league. Players whose shots were already accurate were not update, which was only a few. Some signature style updates as well.

Team Playbook Updates

Playbooks per Vanwolfhawk on Operation Sports. I adjusted play sets for individual players to maximize accuracy of individual and team play. Players get the ball in the right spots and the team play styles are accurate.

Season/Franchise Ready

Current and Opening Day rosters available. Opening day roster has all injuries, lineups, etc. Player injuries are set to expire on their actual return dates.


The rosters can be found on 2K Share under User (eo718) - Sigmaster 1.0 - S_O (w/inj) for opening day and Sigmaster 1.0 - Crnt (w/inj) for the current.

This is a simulation roster and the slider sets enhance it. Countless hours of video research was done for accurate sig shots, styles and play sets and tendencies for nearly every player. Countless hours of CPU vs CPU and Human vs CPU simulations/play testing was done to make sure teams and players play and feel accurate. Tested simulation results have been very accurate in MyLeague/Season mode. The extensive tendency updates, which are based on the actual data for each player greatly enhance the CPU vs Player experience and authenticity of players and teams. Ratings are based on actual data and not swayed just to ensure a specific hierarchy of overall ratings. Still, based on the actual data, the overall ratings do well to distinguish the Superstars from allstars from good players.

Slider Sets

The slider set is designed for realism with the HOF difficulty. The objective was to have the computer play more human, quick decisions, realistic turnovers on both sides, etc. Shooting percentages and game results with this set are more realistic for User and CPU.

The sliders can be found on 2K Share under User (eo718) - HOF+

Additional settings I use for challenge

Settings/ Free Throw Difficulty - 65
Controller Settings/ Defensive Assist W/ Intense-D - 0
Controller Settings/ Boxout Assist Strength - 0


All latest uniforms, etc. are in this roster

I hope you enjoy. Feel free to share feedback.

[Davi Soares Pacheco]

where is this, where I find this set of sliders and roster. I play online

[zetsuboushta]

It's so great to see such roster. Thanks a lot.

[TGsoGood]

Thank you for doing an opening day roster and also incorporating vanwolfhawk's playbooks.

[eko718]

where is this, where I find this set of sliders and roster. I play online

You can find it under my username - eo718

It's so great to see such roster. Thanks a lot.

where is this, where I find this set of sliders and roster. I play online

No prob fellas. Hope you like.

[zetsuboushta]

What i wanted to ask, would you like to do some tweaks with rotations and coaching point of emphasis? For example, Houston is playing "patient offence" right now.

[eko718]

What i wanted to ask, would you like to do some tweaks with rotations and coaching point of emphasis? For example, Houston is playing "patient offence" right now.

If you list some references for those items I can make some updates.

[Rosque]

How is Kuzma a better defender than Randle, Josh Hart has strength and low post defense in 40s yet he is okay vs guys in the post, IT has 99 mid range and quickness in 90s? Sorry but this does not compare to what the Lakers are doing all season long. This was just a quick glance on the team that I follow the most. Also, how is McConnell a better shooter than Redick?

Not trying to belittle your effort but these things do not scream advanced stats for me.

Randlevs Kuzma

Kuzma is fine 1v1 but team defense sux, Randle is good 1v1 and just fine team defense

[eko718]

How is Kuzma a better defender than Randle, Josh Hart has strength and low post defense in 40s yet he is okay vs guys in the post, IT has 99 mid range and quickness in 90s? Sorry but this does not compare to what the Lakers are doing all season long. This was just a quick glance on the team that I follow the most. Also, how is McConnell a better shooter than Redick?

Not trying to belittle your effort but these things do not scream advanced stats for me.

Randlevs Kuzma

Kuzma is fine 1v1 but team defense sux, Randle is good 1v1 and just fine team defense

Everything was based off of players actual statistics at the time that teams ratings were done. Refer to the first post to see the ratings that were addressed. If it's not in that post, you are looking at stock 2K ratings.

[Rosque]

It has a lot of inconsistencies and a lot of weird ratings. It seems like you just put stats are available on front page of ESPN and put that in the roster. It's appreciated what you're trying to do but I'm just a stickler for sim basketball.

[eko718]

It has a lot of inconsistencies and a lot of weird ratings. It seems like you just put stats are available on front page of ESPN and put that in the roster. It's appreciated what you're trying to do but I'm just a stickler for sim basketball.

Again, the ratings are based entirely on statistics of the players and a formula that is scaled with the 2K rating system. I don't know what you mean by inconsistencies, nor whether you are basing that on opinion or actual stats, but the point of the ratings is to be unbiased and based on the statistics. A stickler for sim wouldn't look at the ratings from such a shallow perspective, and would realize that there is much more than ratings which impacts sim play. If you are just looking at ratings and in your head determining that this or that rating looks off in your mind, without knowing the contested vs open shot percentages, how often a player takes those shots, where on the court, what percentage they shoot when they take them, the percentage of rebounds a player grabs when on the floor on defense and offense, the percentage of times a player draws a foul per possession, etc. etc, then I can't do much with your feedback that the ratings look "weird".

You asked about a post up rating for Josh Hart and the speed of Isaiah Thomas earlier... Well, there are no advanced stats or stats period that correlate with post up ratings or speed; this should be obvious. Those ratings were not touched by me.... Blame 2K for that one. Ultimately, the computer plays more intelligently, players and teams play more accurately and percentages/flow of games are more realistic when paired with my slider set. It plays like real basketball; that was the aim.

Thanks for your comments.

[TGsoGood]

[bluejaybrandon]

You asked about a post up rating for Josh Hart and the speed of Isaiah Thomas earlier... Well, there are no advanced stats or stats period that correlate with post up ratings or speed; this should be obvious. Those ratings were not touched by me.

While this might be true, there are things you can do to alter them. Just defaulting to "there is no advanced statistic, therefore I did not touch them" is kinda a cop out in my opinion. Last year when we had a team of amazing guys working on a community roster, those guys came up with formulas for everything. There are stats out there that while they may not directly translate, they can be used to create something better than a default 2k rating.

[eko718]

You asked about a post up rating for Josh Hart and the speed of Isaiah Thomas earlier... Well, there are no advanced stats or stats period that correlate with post up ratings or speed; this should be obvious. Those ratings were not touched by me.

While this might be true, there are things you can do to alter them. Just defaulting to "there is no advanced statistic, therefore I did not touch them" is kinda a cop out in my opinion. Last year when we had a team of amazing guys working on a community roster, those guys came up with formulas for everything. There are stats out there that while they may not directly translate, they can be used to create something better than a default 2k rating.

I focused on particular ratings as per the first post. In my past rosters I did edit items such as speed based on the 3/4th quarter court sprint times in the draft combine and I could have done that this time as well except that there is also a rating for speed with ball, which is purely subjective. If I edited one and not the other, that would throw things off with the ratings. Sure, I could approximate the other speed rating based on the eye test and the 3/4th quarter results, but I opted to go the route of editing what I could specifically improve upon with actual data. Having approached these ratings formulaically, I discovered that 2K actually does rate according to formula(based on data that only coaches and other organizations can access), so for the ratings I did not have enough information to improve according to the standards I had set forth, I let the 2K ratings stand.

It's not a cop out to say "there is no advanced statistic, therefore I did not touch them" as you put it; it is just stating that this particular roster was focused on these particular ratings, for the reasons stated above. Now I am not opposed to continuing to improve the roster by addressing those sort of items, especially now that we have a roster editor on the horizon and that's a different matter. If folks would just approach it like that, we might be more productive here.

As you are working on your own draft class with 60+ players, I am sure you can appreciate the work behind task of:

1. Researching data and reviewing video and calculating player tendencies on appx 400 players and inputting that data (there are appx. 100 tendency categories; I focused on about 50 categories, but some players required more correction)

2. Researching data and calculating ratings based on a proprietary formula on appx 400 players and inputting that data (there are appx. 68 ratings categories; I focused on about 25 categories, but some players required more correction)

3. Researching video on appx 400 players and accurately correcting signature jumpshots (and other signature styles for certain players)

4. Replacing appx 1500 team plays in total (per VanWolfHawks plays -- OS)

5. Researching player video on at least 150 players to determine and correct play sets for individual players, to ensure they are involved in the offense in the roster as they are in real life and play how you'd expect them to. Also to ensure the correct team dynamics, ie: the right people taking the bulk of shots, proper ball distribution and overall intelligent flow (It's not perfect but damn better than 2K rosters).

6. Tweaking and refining the aforementioned areas and sliders based on hours upon hours CPU vs CPU and player vs CPU simulations and Season simulations. etc. etc. etc.

This does not cover all of the work that was done by myself on this roster. Not to mention having to copy it over from one roster to another on the account of new uniforms, etc. being released, which is quite a glitched process using cheat engine off of the 1.04 patch. I think people underestimate the significance of correcting player tendencies ALONE. People are focused on ratings, and 2K updates those continually, but the under the hood that affects gameplay is actually in the player tendencies, plays and play sets. I have a wife and a 1 year old, fam; time is not unlimited. This is a passion project, as all of our works on this site are, and I decided to share it. Hopefully it can be judged on what it does have and how it plays. On top of that, if there is another roster with this level of detail available, let me know; I will gladly take note.

[Dee4Three]

You asked about a post up rating for Josh Hart and the speed of Isaiah Thomas earlier... Well, there are no advanced stats or stats period that correlate with post up ratings or speed; this should be obvious. Those ratings were not touched by me.

While this might be true, there are things you can do to alter them. Just defaulting to "there is no advanced statistic, therefore I did not touch them" is kinda a cop out in my opinion. Last year when we had a team of amazing guys working on a community roster, those guys came up with formulas for everything. There are stats out there that while they may not directly translate, they can be used to create something better than a default 2k rating.

I focused on particular ratings as per the first post. In my past rosters I did edit items such as speed based on the 3/4th quarter court sprint times in the draft combine and I could have done that this time as well except that there is also a rating for speed with ball, which is purely subjective. If I edited one and not the other, that would throw things off with the ratings. Sure, I could approximate the other speed rating based on the eye test and the 3/4th quarter results, but I opted to go the route of editing what I could specifically improve upon with actual data. Having approached these ratings formulaically, I discovered that 2K actually does rate according to formula(based on data that only coaches and other organizations can access), so for the ratings I did not have enough information to improve according to the standards I had set forth, I let the 2K ratings stand.

It's not a cop out to say "there is no advanced statistic, therefore I did not touch them" as you put it; it is just stating that this particular roster was focused on these particular ratings, for the reasons stated above. Now I am not opposed to continuing to improve the roster by addressing those sort of items, especially now that we have a roster editor on the horizon and that's a different matter. If folks would just approach it like that, we might be more productive here.

As you are working on your own draft class with 60+ players, I am sure you can appreciate the work behind task of:

1. Researching data and reviewing video and calculating player tendencies on appx 300 players and inputting that data (there are appx. 100 tendency categories; I focused on about 50 categories, but some players required more correction)

2. Researching data and calculating ratings based on a proprietary formula on appx 300 players and inputting that data (there are appx. 68 ratings categories; I focused on about 25 categories, but some players required more correction)

3. Researching video on appx 300 players and accurately correcting signature jumpshots (and other signature styles for certain players)

4. Replacing appx 1500 team plays in total (per VanWolfHawks plays -- OS)

5. Researching player video on at least 150 players to determine and correct play sets for individual players, to ensure they are involved in the offense in the roster as they are in real life and play how you'd expect them to. Also to ensure the correct team dynamics, ie: the right people taking the bulk of shots, proper ball distribution and overall intelligent flow (It's not perfect but damn better than 2K rosters).

6. Tweaking and refining the aforementioned areas and sliders based on hours upon hours CPU vs CPU and player vs CPU simulations and Season simulations. etc. etc. etc.

This does not cover all of the work that was done by myself on this roster. Not to mention having to copy it over from one roster to another on the account of new uniforms, etc. being released, which is quite a glitched process using cheat engine off of the 1.04 patch. I think people underestimate the significance of correcting player tendencies ALONE. People are focused on ratings, and 2K updates those continually, but the under the hood that affects gameplay is actually in the player tendencies, plays and play sets. I have a wife and a 1 year old, fam; time is not unlimited. This is a passion project, as all of our works on this site are, and I decided to share it. Hopefully it can be judged on what it does have and how it plays. On top of that, if there is another roster with this level of detail available, let me know; I will gladly take note.

2K has so many ratings and tendencies that are off, it's not even funny. To say that they are somehow using real formulas from data that they gathered from real NBA teams is almost unbelievable. I've seen so many ratings, tendencies, dunk packages etc that were copy and pasted onto players.... they even released the original version of the game with the all time teams players missing badges.

Many of the signature shots are not even close. Players sim stats (like last year) are way off a lot of the time, meaning that the combination of tendencies and ratings are not realistic. This game is not only optimized poorly (The gameplay in general), but the person/people who work on the rosters does suspect work at best.

You can't get a realistic game out of 2K18 if you are playing and trying your hardest, because it's just a free for all into the paint on every possession. No matter what you do with ratings or tendencies, it does nothing to stop the driving by anybody, with anybody, at any time. It also doesn't help with the help defense, or shots hitting the bottom of the rim, or the AI playing like they have no clue what they are doing.

Good idea on this project, but lets not act like 2K is doing due diligence with roster creation.

[bongo88]

Thank you for sharing this roster. Did you change any classic teams (vanwolf playbooks for classic teams/player tendencies/ratings)? Also, i was wondering, did you make any changes to the badges?
Anyways, thanks for sharing.

[eko718]

You asked about a post up rating for Josh Hart and the speed of Isaiah Thomas earlier... Well, there are no advanced stats or stats period that correlate with post up ratings or speed; this should be obvious. Those ratings were not touched by me.

While this might be true, there are things you can do to alter them. Just defaulting to "there is no advanced statistic, therefore I did not touch them" is kinda a cop out in my opinion. Last year when we had a team of amazing guys working on a community roster, those guys came up with formulas for everything. There are stats out there that while they may not directly translate, they can be used to create something better than a default 2k rating.

I focused on particular ratings as per the first post. In my past rosters I did edit items such as speed based on the 3/4th quarter court sprint times in the draft combine and I could have done that this time as well except that there is also a rating for speed with ball, which is purely subjective. If I edited one and not the other, that would throw things off with the ratings. Sure, I could approximate the other speed rating based on the eye test and the 3/4th quarter results, but I opted to go the route of editing what I could specifically improve upon with actual data. Having approached these ratings formulaically, I discovered that 2K actually does rate according to formula(based on data that only coaches and other organizations can access), so for the ratings I did not have enough information to improve according to the standards I had set forth, I let the 2K ratings stand.

It's not a cop out to say "there is no advanced statistic, therefore I did not touch them" as you put it; it is just stating that this particular roster was focused on these particular ratings, for the reasons stated above. Now I am not opposed to continuing to improve the roster by addressing those sort of items, especially now that we have a roster editor on the horizon and that's a different matter. If folks would just approach it like that, we might be more productive here.

As you are working on your own draft class with 60+ players, I am sure you can appreciate the work behind task of:

1. Researching data and reviewing video and calculating player tendencies on appx 300 players and inputting that data (there are appx. 100 tendency categories; I focused on about 50 categories, but some players required more correction)

2. Researching data and calculating ratings based on a proprietary formula on appx 300 players and inputting that data (there are appx. 68 ratings categories; I focused on about 25 categories, but some players required more correction)

3. Researching video on appx 300 players and accurately correcting signature jumpshots (and other signature styles for certain players)

4. Replacing appx 1500 team plays in total (per VanWolfHawks plays -- OS)

5. Researching player video on at least 150 players to determine and correct play sets for individual players, to ensure they are involved in the offense in the roster as they are in real life and play how you'd expect them to. Also to ensure the correct team dynamics, ie: the right people taking the bulk of shots, proper ball distribution and overall intelligent flow (It's not perfect but damn better than 2K rosters).

6. Tweaking and refining the aforementioned areas and sliders based on hours upon hours CPU vs CPU and player vs CPU simulations and Season simulations. etc. etc. etc.

This does not cover all of the work that was done by myself on this roster. Not to mention having to copy it over from one roster to another on the account of new uniforms, etc. being released, which is quite a glitched process using cheat engine off of the 1.04 patch. I think people underestimate the significance of correcting player tendencies ALONE. People are focused on ratings, and 2K updates those continually, but the under the hood that affects gameplay is actually in the player tendencies, plays and play sets. I have a wife and a 1 year old, fam; time is not unlimited. This is a passion project, as all of our works on this site are, and I decided to share it. Hopefully it can be judged on what it does have and how it plays. On top of that, if there is another roster with this level of detail available, let me know; I will gladly take note.

2K has so many ratings and tendencies that are off, it's not even funny. To say that they are somehow using real formulas from data that they gathered from real NBA teams is almost unbelievable. I've seen so many ratings, tendencies, dunk packages etc that were copy and pasted onto players.... they even released the original version of the game with the all time teams players missing badges.

Many of the signature shots are not even close. Players sim stats (like last year) are way off a lot of the time, meaning that the combination of tendencies and ratings are not realistic. This game is not only optimized poorly (The gameplay in general), but the person/people who work on the rosters does suspect work at best.

You can't get a realistic game out of 2K18 if you are playing and trying your hardest, because it's just a free for all into the paint on every possession. No matter what you do with ratings or tendencies, it does nothing to stop the driving by anybody, with anybody, at any time. It also doesn't help with the help defense, or shots hitting the bottom of the rim, or the AI playing like they have no clue what they are doing.

Good idea on this project, but lets not act like 2K is doing due diligence with roster creation.

Not saying they are doing a great job with the rosters, which is why I did the roster updates in the first place! When I say they use a formula for ratings, I am speaking primarily of the fact that there is a formula to the ratings scale, and how they translate a statistic to a number rating. Some of the ratings I did not adjust due to lack of data seemed in line for certain players, then the scale would be abandoned for others; so I agree that many of the 2K ratings are problematic. But as I mentioned I focused on specific ones that have a big impact on gameplay for this roster.

As far as the signature shots, getting that accurate was a chore in and of itself from the research, to the fact that you cannot even rotate the player in edit mode to see the shot from all angles. Fortunately, I figured out a workaround for that. As far as gameplay, test out the roster with my slider set and see. I've played several season games and the results are consistently on point from a gameplay and statistical standpoint. Additionally, the game is a challenge but not an unfair one; though you will likely need to gameplan to win games.

[eko718]

Thank you for sharing this roster. Did you change any classic teams (vanwolf playbooks for classic teams/player tendencies/ratings)? Also, i was wondering, did you make any changes to the badges?
Anyways, thanks for sharing.

Thanks bongo... no, I didn't make any edits to classic teams. I may go into that as we have a roster editor coming and some good base rosters being released for classics. I did adjust some badges but not many.

[TGsoGood]

I will be using the opening night roster to start a new myleague. Those playbook edits from vanwolfhawk are what I have been waiting for. If you do add them to the retro teams please let us know

[Rosque]

You are right. I do not have statistical backing that Josh Hart does not deserve 40 rating for post defense and 40 for strength. But defense is 50% of NBA game. Just watch this and tell me honestly you think he deserves a 40 rating for both. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q55krpD-EE&

Also..if you don't think IT lost a step after hip injury...sorry to hear that.

Anyways, there are core attributes that are not touched. I did try to play with this roster and Randle seems lost on defense and Hart gets beat by everyone in the post when I switch on pnr. Also, IT looks like a he's still playing for Celtics with that unstoppable mid range.

[Dee4Three]

test out the roster with my slider set and see. I've played several season games and the results are consistently on point from a gameplay and statistical standpoint. Additionally, the game is a challenge but not an unfair one; though you will likely need to gameplan to win games.

I've tried the game with all defensive sliders jacked up to 100, and ive tried almost every single slider set you can think of. NOTHING fixes the one on one defense, and the help defense is almost as bad. With defensive sliders jacked to 100, I can drive in from the perimeter with Steven Adams and score 8 or 9 out of 10 times.

If you want to fake simulation, by all means go for it. But no, the defense in this game is not challenging no matter what sliders you use, because it's a motion system issue. If you havnt already, check out my defense thread. I have videos of exactly what I am talking about.

And no, your sliders cannot make it harder than playing on HOF default and after changing defensive sliders to 100. I even brought my player speed down to like 10 to see what happened, and I was crushing it driving from the perimeter with Hassan Whiteside.

The people who say that they get a realistic experience, are not playing the game at their best. If you are trying your hardest against the CPU, you can just run by your perimeter defender every single time. I have shown that time and time again. Someone else suggested that sim needed to be faked, and said that's actually what people should do. To me, that ruins the competition side of things, I play the game to compete, not to LET the CPU guard me better even though I know I can beat them by just running by them. The game is supposed to challenge you, not make you fake it for a challenge.

Either way, glad people are not giving up hope. But don't expect anything to change with the broken motion system until 2K19, we just need to hope overall that it's better with the new game.

[eko718]

test out the roster with my slider set and see. I've played several season games and the results are consistently on point from a gameplay and statistical standpoint. Additionally, the game is a challenge but not an unfair one; though you will likely need to gameplan to win games.

I've tried the game with all defensive sliders jacked up to 100, and ive tried almost every single slider set you can think of. NOTHING fixes the one on one defense, and the help defense is almost as bad. With defensive sliders jacked to 100, I can drive in from the perimeter with Steven Adams and score 8 or 9 out of 10 times.

If you want to fake simulation, by all means go for it. But no, the defense in this game is not challenging no matter what sliders you use, because it's a motion system issue. If you havnt already, check out my defense thread. I have videos of exactly what I am talking about.

And no, your sliders cannot make it harder than playing on HOF default and after changing defensive sliders to 100. I even brought my player speed down to like 10 to see what happened, and I was crushing it driving from the perimeter with Hassan Whiteside.

The people who say that they get a realistic experience, are not playing the game at their best. If you are trying your hardest against the CPU, you can just run by your perimeter defender every single time. I have shown that time and time again. Someone else suggested that sim needed to be faked, and said that's actually what people should do. To me, that ruins the competition side of things, I play the game to compete, not to LET the CPU guard me better even though I know I can beat them by just running by them. The game is supposed to challenge you, not make you fake it for a challenge.

Either way, glad people are not giving up hope. But don't expect anything to change with the broken motion system until 2K19, we just need to hope overall that it's better with the new game.

All this said and you haven't tried the roster it sounds like. Your prerogative; I'm enjoying the experience and receiving sim results while playing naturally. Everyone plays the game differently though, so looks like you'll need to hope for the best out of 2K19.

[eko718]

You are right. I do not have statistical backing that Josh Hart does not deserve 40 rating for post defense and 40 for strength. But defense is 50% of NBA game. Just watch this and tell me honestly you think he deserves a 40 rating for both. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q55krpD-EE&

Also..if you don't think IT lost a step after hip injury...sorry to hear that.

Anyways, there are core attributes that are not touched. I did try to play with this roster and Randle seems lost on defense and Hart gets beat by everyone in the post when I switch on pnr. Also, IT looks like a he's still playing for Celtics with that unstoppable mid range.

The whole point is Rosque that those complaints are about ratings done by 2K. Asked for the mid range rating of Isaiah Thomas, that's based on what his stats were at the time I did his ratings. Don't know what else to say about it. He was shooting what he was shooting at that time.

[eko718]

I will be using the opening night roster to start a new myleague. Those playbook edits from vanwolfhawk are what I have been waiting for. If you do add them to the retro teams please let us know

Cool, will be glad to hear your feedback. I will let you know regarding the retro teams if I do that.

[Dee4Three]

test out the roster with my slider set and see. I've played several season games and the results are consistently on point from a gameplay and statistical standpoint. Additionally, the game is a challenge but not an unfair one; though you will likely need to gameplan to win games.

I've tried the game with all defensive sliders jacked up to 100, and ive tried almost every single slider set you can think of. NOTHING fixes the one on one defense, and the help defense is almost as bad. With defensive sliders jacked to 100, I can drive in from the perimeter with Steven Adams and score 8 or 9 out of 10 times.

If you want to fake simulation, by all means go for it. But no, the defense in this game is not challenging no matter what sliders you use, because it's a motion system issue. If you havnt already, check out my defense thread. I have videos of exactly what I am talking about.

And no, your sliders cannot make it harder than playing on HOF default and after changing defensive sliders to 100. I even brought my player speed down to like 10 to see what happened, and I was crushing it driving from the perimeter with Hassan Whiteside.

The people who say that they get a realistic experience, are not playing the game at their best. If you are trying your hardest against the CPU, you can just run by your perimeter defender every single time. I have shown that time and time again. Someone else suggested that sim needed to be faked, and said that's actually what people should do. To me, that ruins the competition side of things, I play the game to compete, not to LET the CPU guard me better even though I know I can beat them by just running by them. The game is supposed to challenge you, not make you fake it for a challenge.

Either way, glad people are not giving up hope. But don't expect anything to change with the broken motion system until 2K19, we just need to hope overall that it's better with the new game.

All this said and you haven't tried the roster it sounds like. Your prerogative; I'm enjoying the experience and receiving sim results while playing naturally. Everyone plays the game differently though, so looks like you'll need to hope for the best out of 2K19.

No eko, I just understand the way the game works. I don't need to try it.

And I'm not waiting until 2K19, I have all the 2K's going back to 2k6, and all Lives going back to 06. I have plenty of basketball games to be played.

However, I don't want to hurt this thread. With that being said, ill bow out. I hope people have a good time with your roster, and I sincerely mean that.